From defencenews 2011
ISLAMABAD - In response to India's pursuit of missile defenses,
Pakistan has expanded its countermeasure efforts, primarily through
development of maneuvering re-entry vehicles. The Army Strategic
Forces Command, which controls Pakistan's ballistic missiles, has since
at least 2004 said it wanted to develop such warheads; analysts now
believe these are in service. Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer at the Department of Defence and Strategic
Studies at Islamabad's Quaid-e-Azam University, said that in addition
to maneuverable warheads, multiple independently targetable re-
entry vehicles (MIRVs) may be developed to stay ahead of India's
"multilayered ballistic-missile defense system" and potential future
countermeasures. "This, coupled with submarine-launched,
nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, would ensure
the survivability of its nuclear deterrent and
enhance the effectiveness of its missile force
that can beat any Indian defenses," he said. When asked about the threat posed by India's anti-ballistic missile
(ABM) program, Harsh Pant, reader of international relations at the
Defence Studies Department, King's College London, said it depended
on the capability India eventually acquired. "Many in India see an Indian missile defense capability as the only
effective way to counter what they consider as Pakistan's 'nuclear
blackmail,'" he said. He cited the ongoing conflict in Kashmir, the 1999 Kargil conflict and
the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks as examples.Strategic
Disadvantage These incidents "demonstrated for many the inability of
India to come up with an appropriate response to the stability-
instability paradox operating on the subcontinent that has put India
at a strategic disadvantage vis-à-vis Pakistan." He further explained, "A missile defense system would help India
blunt Pakistan's 'first use' nuclear force posture that had led Pakistan
to believe that it had inhibited India from launching a conventional
attack against it for fear of its escalation to the nuclear level. With a
missile defense system in place, India would be able to restore the
status quo ante, thereby making a conventional military option against Pakistan potent again."Such a missile defense system and a
second-strike capability "would enhance the uncertainties of India's
potential adversaries, regardless of the degree of effectiveness of
missile interception, and would act as a disincentive to their resort to
nuclear weapons," he said. Asked whether Pakistan's countermeasures would be effective
against such ABM systems, Pant replied, "most definitely." He said, "According to various reports, Pakistan has been developing
MIRV capability for the Shaheen-II ballistic missiles and [the] Shaheen-
III missile is under development." He also explained there was a further danger for India in Pakistan's
countermeasure efforts. "Although the current capability of Pakistani missiles is built around
radar seekers, the integration of re-entry vehicles would make these
extremely potent and defeat the anti-ballistic missile defense systems.
This would be especially true of Indian aircraft carriers that would
become extremely vulnerable," he said. While measures to maintain the credibility of the land-based arm of
the deterrent may prove to be adequate, the security of the future
sea-based arm of the nuclear triad is not as clear-cut. Analysts have for years speculated that the Navy will equip its
submarines with a variant of the Babur cruise missile armed with a
nuclear warhead. However, whether a cruise-missile-based arm of
the nuclear triad at sea would be effective and survivable in the face
of Indian air defenses is uncertain. The Soviet Union developed a counter to the BGM-109 Tomahawk
nearly 30 years ago in the form of the MiG-31 Foxhound, which had a
powerful look down/shoot down radar and a potent missile system.
The Indian Air Force claims its Su-30MKI Flanker has similar
capabilities. When this was put to analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military
Consortium think tank, he said the interception of cruise missiles is
not so simple."I think Babur will form the sea-based arm of the
Pakistani nuclear deterrent" he said, "but the problem in targeting
subsonic cruise missiles is that they are harder to detect due to their
lower radar cross-signature, low-level navigation, and use of waypoints to circumvent more secure and heavily defended areas." "By the time you detect them, there is not much time left to vector
aircraft for interception." However, Shabbir conceded it would be possible for an airborne
interceptor to shoot down a missile like Babur. "An aircraft already
on [patrol] might be lucky to pick it up on its own radar well in
advance [if looking in the correct direction], or vectored to it by
ground-based radar."
From defencenews 2011
ISLAMABAD - In response to India's pursuit of missile defenses,
Pakistan has expanded its countermeasure efforts, primarily through
development of maneuvering re-entry vehicles. The Army Strategic
Forces Command, which controls Pakistan's ballistic missiles, has since
at least 2004 said it wanted to develop such warheads; analysts now
believe these are in service. Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer at the Department of Defence and Strategic
Studies at Islamabad's Quaid-e-Azam University, said that in addition
to maneuverable warheads, multiple independently targetable re-
entry vehicles (MIRVs) may be developed to stay ahead of India's
"multilayered ballistic-missile defense system" and potential future
countermeasures. "This, coupled with submarine-launched,
nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, would ensure
the survivability of its nuclear deterrent and
enhance the effectiveness of its missile force
that can beat any Indian defenses," he said. When asked about the threat posed by India's anti-ballistic missile
(ABM) program, Harsh Pant, reader of international relations at the
Defence Studies Department, King's College London, said it depended
on the capability India eventually acquired. "Many in India see an Indian missile defense capability as the only
effective way to counter what they consider as Pakistan's 'nuclear
blackmail,'" he said. He cited the ongoing conflict in Kashmir, the 1999 Kargil conflict and
the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks as examples.Strategic
Disadvantage These incidents "demonstrated for many the inability of
India to come up with an appropriate response to the stability-
instability paradox operating on the subcontinent that has put India
at a strategic disadvantage vis-à-vis Pakistan." He further explained, "A missile defense system would help India
blunt Pakistan's 'first use' nuclear force posture that had led Pakistan
to believe that it had inhibited India from launching a conventional
attack against it for fear of its escalation to the nuclear level. With a
missile defense system in place, India would be able to restore the
status quo ante, thereby making a conventional military option against Pakistan potent again."Such a missile defense system and a
second-strike capability "would enhance the uncertainties of India's
potential adversaries, regardless of the degree of effectiveness of
missile interception, and would act as a disincentive to their resort to
nuclear weapons," he said. Asked whether Pakistan's countermeasures would be effective
against such ABM systems, Pant replied, "most definitely." He said, "According to various reports, Pakistan has been developing
MIRV capability for the Shaheen-II ballistic missiles and [the] Shaheen-
III missile is under development." He also explained there was a further danger for India in Pakistan's
countermeasure efforts. "Although the current capability of Pakistani missiles is built around
radar seekers, the integration of re-entry vehicles would make these
extremely potent and defeat the anti-ballistic missile defense systems.
This would be especially true of Indian aircraft carriers that would
become extremely vulnerable," he said. While measures to maintain the credibility of the land-based arm of
the deterrent may prove to be adequate, the security of the future
sea-based arm of the nuclear triad is not as clear-cut. Analysts have for years speculated that the Navy will equip its
submarines with a variant of the Babur cruise missile armed with a
nuclear warhead. However, whether a cruise-missile-based arm of
the nuclear triad at sea would be effective and survivable in the face
of Indian air defenses is uncertain. The Soviet Union developed a counter to the BGM-109 Tomahawk
nearly 30 years ago in the form of the MiG-31 Foxhound, which had a
powerful look down/shoot down radar and a potent missile system.
The Indian Air Force claims its Su-30MKI Flanker has similar
capabilities. When this was put to analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military
Consortium think tank, he said the interception of cruise missiles is
not so simple."I think Babur will form the sea-based arm of the
Pakistani nuclear deterrent" he said, "but the problem in targeting
subsonic cruise missiles is that they are harder to detect due to their
lower radar cross-signature, low-level navigation, and use of waypoints to circumvent more secure and heavily defended areas." "By the time you detect them, there is not much time left to vector
aircraft for interception." However, Shabbir conceded it would be possible for an airborne
interceptor to shoot down a missile like Babur. "An aircraft already
on [patrol] might be lucky to pick it up on its own radar well in
advance [if looking in the correct direction], or vectored to it by
ground-based radar."
I will meet this guy again for some more details
